| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 981 2020 SLD 981 2020 SCMR 1069 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeal No. 51 of 2011, decided on 22nd April, 2020, Date of hearing: 19th February, 2020.
MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMAD, JUSTICE
Ch. M. Amin Javed, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. M. Almas, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No.1.
Civil Appeal No. 51 of 2011, decided on 22nd April, 2020, Date of hearing: 19th February, 2020.
MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMAD, JUSTICE
Ch. M. Amin Javed, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. M. Almas, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No.1.
MUHAMMAD MANSHA
VS
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN AND OTHERS
Law: Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
Section: 5,23,(2)
(a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)--- ----Ss. 5 & 23(2)---Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act (XV of 1997) [since repealed]---Sale/ disposition by the debtor, of his property, after pronouncement of a and decree by the Banking Court, without written permission of the Banking Court vide [section 23(2) of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001]---Pre-requisites---Banking Court---Scope---Banking Court in the context of S. 23(2) of the Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001 ('the 2001 Ordinance'), was the Court established by virtue of S. 5 of the 2001 Ordinance, and thus the and decree required to invoke the provisions of S. 23(2) of the 2001 Ordinance, was the and decree passed by a Banking Court established under the 2001 Ordinance, and not any other Court, and for that matter, not a "Banking Court" that was established under the repealed Banking Companies (Recovery of Loans, Advances, Credits and Finances) Act, 1997---Ordinance, 2001 did not, either expressly or impliedly, provide for any retrospective application of the provision of S. 23(2) thereof, the same could not therefore operate to reverse or undo a transaction which took effect from 18-8-2001, prior to the date the said provision and the law containing the same, i.e. 2001 Ordinance, came into existence. (b) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Retrospective effect---Scope---When the legislature through an enactment altered the rights of parties by taking away or conferring any right of action, such enactment did not affect pending actions, unless provided in express terms within the enactment---General rule of common law was that the statute changing the law ought not (to affect past events), unless the intention appeared with reasonable certainty to be understood as applying to facts or events that had already occurred in such a way so as to confer or impose or otherwise effect rights or liabilities which the law had defined with references to past events. PLD 1969 SC 187; (1957) 96 CLR 261, 267 and PLD 2003 SC 818 ref. ORDER MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE:---.--- A property…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492